Skip to main content

View Diary: George W. Bush: "Income inequality is real" (26 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It's progressive in that the rich paid a higher (0+ / 0-)

    percentage of the total individual income tax burden. We tend to think of progressive as only high marginal rates for high income earners, but any time the tax burden shifts to those with more income, it is a progressive shift regardless of marginal rates.

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Sat Jun 22, 2013 at 10:30:31 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Give me more money (6+ / 0-)

      and I'll be happy to pay more taxes.

      Once the rich get 100% of the income they will complain that they have to pay 100% of the taxes.  Poor souls.

      Republican tax policies have led to financial conditions which have caused Republicans to demand cuts to programs they have always opposed.

      by AppleP on Sun Jun 23, 2013 at 05:35:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  So if the lower 99% had no taxable income at all (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      liberalconservative, splashy

      and the top 1% paid all the income tax because they had all the income, that would be the ultimate in progressive taxation, right?

      I know, I know: It's an absurd hypothetical. But it illustrates the fact that looking at who is paying how much in taxes doesn't tell the whole story. In fact, it tells very little of the story.

      The generally-accepted definition of progressive taxation is that marginal rates increase as income increases. I'll stick with that definition, thankyouverymuch.

      Let us all have the strength to see the humanity in our enemies, and the courage to let them see the humanity in ourselves.

      by Nowhere Man on Sun Jun 23, 2013 at 08:50:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site